(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "North Carolina tobacco report [serial]"

TOBACCO REPORT 





THE BULLETIN 

of the 
North Carolina Department of Agriculture 

James A. Graham, Commisskmer 



Number 200 



May, 1970 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

King Tobacco and the Soaring Sixties 4 

Canadian Leaf Marketing 8 

North Carolina Flue-Cured Crops, 1919-1969 13 

State Marketing Summary, 1969-1970 14 

North Carolina Tobacco Warehouse Sales Report, 1369-1970 16 

Summary of Dealer and Warehouse Resales, 1969 18 

Producer and Gross Sales of Flue Cured Tobacco by States, 1969 18 

Flue-Cured Movement In and Out of North Carolina 19 

Burley Movement In and Out of North Carolina 19 

Stabilization Receipts by Belts, 1969 20 

North Carolina Burley Tobacco Allotments, 1970 21 

North Carolina Flue-Cured Tobacco Allotments, 1970 22 

North Carolina Burley Crops, 1928-1969 24 

North Carolina Tobacco Warehouses and Operators 

By Belts and Markets, 1969 26 

Domestic Cigarette Consumption By Kinds, 1969 Back Cover 



For free distribution by the Tobacco Section, 

Markets Division, North Carolina Department 

of Agriculture, Raleigh, N. C. 

Curtis F. Tarleton, Director, Division of Markets 

J. H. Cyrus. In Charge, Tobacco Marketing Section 

J. T. Bunn, Tobacco Marketing Specialist 



FOREWORD 

The twenty-first annual is- 
sue of the North Carolina 
Tobacco Report has been pre- 
pared under the direction of 
J. H. Cyrus, in charge of the 
Tobacco Marketing Section, 
Division of Markets, North 
Carolina Department of Agri- 
culture. 

The annual publication con- 
tains a wealth of information 
pertaining to market statistics 
and the current tobacco situa- 
tion along with other data 
which is of interest through- 
out the tobacco industry. Some 
of the data in this publication 
was made possible through the 
long standing cooperation and 
good relationship which is maintained between the various State 
and Federal agencies and other segments of the tobacco industry. 
As usual, recognition is given the Cooperative Crop Report- 
ing Service, the Agricultural Stabilization Conservation Service, 
the Flue-Cured Tobacco Cooperative Stabilization Corporation 
and the U. S. Tobacco Division, Consumer and Marketing Service 
for their contribution to this issue. 

The cover picture shows the Canadian Dutch Auction Clock 
in operation. This issue also includes a feature article by J. H. 
Cyrus describing the Canadian marketing system and functions 
of the Marketing Board as observed by Mr. Cyrus and Curtis F. 
Tarleton, Director of the Division of Markets, North Carolina 
Department of Agriculture, during a visit to the Canadian 
markets following the opening of their 1969-70 marketing season. 
This article emphasizes some of the efficiencies of the Canadian 
marketing system that should be of interest to all segments of 
our flue-cured industry. 





0^uJi< 



Commissioner of Agriculture 



King Tobacco and the Soaring Sixties- 
Shows Hope for the Seventies 

Tobacco came through the ravaging attacks of the soaring 
sixties a httle battle scarred but still king of the Tarheel economy. 
Tobacco still accounts for the largest share of the total farm in- 
come in North Carolina. However, during the sixties, increases 
in cash returns from several other crops, livestock and livestock 
products did reduce tobacco's share of the total farm income in 
North Carolina from approximately 50 percent in the early sixties 
to its present level of around 40 per cent of the total cash farm 
receipts. 

Production Down 

The average flue-cured production and volume of sales show- 
ed a decline during the last half of the sixties due to tighter 
controls under the acreage-poundage program. However, Tarheel 
farmers' gross income from tobacco has been maintained at 
slightly more than one-half billion dollars annually throughout 
the decade. This was possible through a gradual increase in the 
prices paid farmers, which rose from an average of 57.9 cents 
per pound in 1960 to a record average of 72 cents in 1969. 

North Carolina flue-cured growers received $502 million for 
697 million pounds of tobacco sold in 1969. The average gross 
income for Tarheel flue-cured growers during the last decade 
was $509 million from an average production of 800 million 
pounds. 

North Carolina burley growers received $13.3 million from 
their 1969 crop of 19 million pounds. This is about the same as the 
last ten years' average production and gross receipts of burley 
growers. 

Domestic Peai< 

History will record the sixties as a decade of unparalleled 
progress for the domestic tobacco industry. At the same time, 
it experienced some of the most severe attacks in history by anti- 
tobacco zealots who would destroy this great heritage. 

Despite these smear tactics of anti-tobacco forces and ex- 
orbitant taxation by state and local governments, the cigarette 
industry rounded out the sixties holding its own near the peak 
level it had risen to during the decade. For instance, total cig- 



arette output rose from 506 6 billion in 1960 to an all-time record 
high of 579.9 bilhon cigarettes in 1968. It now appears that the 
output of all cigarettes during 1969 was maintained at a level 
just slightly less than the record of the previous year. 

It is interesting to note that while United States consump- 
tion of cigarettes declined an estimated 2 percent in 1969, world 
consumption outside the United States increased approximately 
5 percent. Thus, it appears that the United States is about the 
only place in the world where cigarette consumption is currently 
dropping. 

New Technology 

The sixties brought forth many changes and technological 
advances throughout the tobacco industry. Probably one of the 
most significant changes was the complete shift from the market- 
ing of tied to untied flue-cured tobacco between the years of 
1962 and 1968, and the implementing of a pre-sheeting system to 
improve the efficiency of handling loose leaf tobacco. While many 
buying companies did not look upon loose leaf sales as an ad- 
vancement in the market, it did serve a real purpose in helping 
farmers overcome labor shortages and cut their cost of handling. 

The major technological advancements in the tobacco in- 
dustry during the sixties were in the areas of leaf processing 
and cigarette manufacturing. For instance, technology led cigar- 
ette manufacturers to large-scale use of the reconstituted tobacco 
process which permits more complete utilization of the entire 
leaf, including stems and small particles that previously could 
not to be used in cigarettes. At the same time, new cigarette filters 
were being developed which led to a continuous rise in filter 
tip cigarette output during the last decade, from 52 percent in 
1960 to 78 percent in 1969. Then, as the decade of the sixties 
came to an end, technology wrought new processes of fluffing 
tobacco to increase its cigarette filling capacity. 

The result of these advances in processing and manufactur- 
ing, coupled with the use of more imported tobacco in cigarette 
blends, has been a pronounced decline in the amount of flue-cured 
tobacco used in cigarette manufacture. For instance, the amount 
of flue-cured tobacco used in the blend of the total U. S. cig- 
arette output has declined from 731 million pounds in 1960 to 
652 million pounds in 1968. In other words, the use of flue-cured 
tobacco dropped about 13 percent between 1960 and 1968, while 
cigarette production increased 14 percent during the same period. 



From these figures it appears on the surface that the new- 
technology apphed in processing and manufacturing has been an 
economic advance only to the manufacturers. However, a look 
beneath the surface shows that, through the application of new 
technology, makers of cigarettes were able to hold their manu- 
facturers' prices to a minimal level while improving the product 
to meet the consumer's preference. So there is no doubt that these 
technological advances in the industry have helped to maintain 
and, in many instances, actually increased the demand for cig- 
arettes. Therefore, as cigarette manufacturers continue to apply 
new technology to make their product more economical to the 
consumer and at the same time improve their product so as to 
meet the current outside pressures and consumers' changing de- 
mands, the long range effect will likely be future gains in cig- 
arette consumption. Thus, in the long run, the advances in tech- 
nology experienced during the sixties and their continuation in- 
to the new decade will have the effect of maintaining or possibly 
increasing the market demand for the farmers' tobacco produc- 
tion during the seventies. 

Exports 

The average exports of flue-cured and hurley tobacco reach- 
ed a record level during the sixties. Exports of flue-cured tobacco 
from 1960 to 1969 averaged 492 million pounds per year compared 
to an average of 452 million pounds per year during the previous 
decade. During the last four years of the decade — 1966-69 — flue- 
cured exports soared to record levels averaging 542 million 
pounds per year. The exports of hurley tobacco increased by 
more than one-third during the sixties, reaching a peak level of 
57 million pounds, with average exports of 47 million pounds 
per year throughout the decade. 

The New Decade 

In the new decade of the seventies, tobacco will continue to 
play an important role in the American way of life with con- 
sumers spending more than $10 million annually for tobacco 
products. It is very likely that with the emphasis now being 
placed on research and pollution, the truth will break through 
during this decade to relieve the pressures that have built up 
concerning smoking and health. This would allow sales of cig- 
arettes to return to their normal rate of growth in a growing 
population. 



In North Carolina tobacco will continue to be the leading 
contributor to the agricultural economy and a major factor in 
the industrial economy of this state during the seventies. Tarheel 
flue-cured and burley tobacco growers will continue to receive 
slightly more than one-half bilhon dollars annually from the 
sale of their crops. During the decade ahead tobacco farm mech- 
anization will be the intervening factor to reverse the farmers' 
cost-price squeeze. 

Cigarette output which has currently leveled off will likely 
stabilize near the current level during the early years of the new 
decade before starting a slow move upward again. 

The greatest challenge to all segments of the tobacco indus- 
try during this decade is to maintain its unity of efforts to 
strengthen the traditional positive image of tobacco and its use. 



Canadian Leaf Market Interesting 

By J. H. Cyrus, In Charge 

Tobacco Marketing Section 

N. C. Department of Agriculture 

A visit to the Ontario, Canada, flue-cured tobacco markets 
at Tillsonburg, Delhi, and Aylmer provides one with a liberal 
education in efficiency in marketing. 

Out of the despair and frustrations experienced by Ontario 
tobacco farmers in disposing of their crops to buyers making an 
offer to them at the barn door on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, the 
Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing System was 
born in 1957. The system is a farmer-owned, non-profit corpora- 
tion estabhshed under the Farm Products Marketing Act of On- 
tario. 

The marketing system is operated and controlled by the On- 
tario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers Marketing Board, which con- 
sists of 15 members. 

Of these, 14 are elected by growers in the 14 designated dis- 
tricts and one share-grower member is appointed by the elected 
board. 

Authority Of Board 

The marketing board has complete control over all phases of 
the production and marketing of flue-cured tobacco in the On- 
tario Province, under authority granted by the Farm Products 
Marketing Act. 

One of the first functions of the board before the beginning 
of a new crop year is to sit down in conference with representa- 
tives of the buying trade to determine the volume of tobacco 
needed to supply market demand. 

After the needed supply has been projected and firm com- 
mitments are obtained from the domestic and export trade, the 
marketing board then establishes the current quota for each of 
the 4,500 licensed producers. This is done by adjusting the grow- 
er's permanently assigned base quota either up or down by a 
certain percentage. 

The 1969 quota, which averaged about 34 acres per grower, 
was established at 23 percent below the base quota. Average 
yields would have resulted in production of about 200 million 
pounds, the volume for which the marketing board had com- 
mitments. However, most growers produced record yields this 
year and the current crop estimate is 220 million pounds. 
Checking For MH-30 

There is no provision for price supports in the Ontario mar- 



keting system. The extra 20 million pounds expected to be sold 
this year are currently causing a slight decline in most grade 
prices compared with 1968 prices. 

After quotas have been established early in each year, the 
marketing board is then responsible for measuring planted 
acreage of individual producers; spot-checking for MH-30 sucker 
control chemical, which cannot legally be used in Canada; es- 
timating size of production by taking sample weights in each 
grower's packhouse; and for making a further check of the num- 
ber of tobacco bales a grower has in his packhouse after he noti- 
fies the board that a portion of his crop is ready for sale. 

The marketing board keeps a complete record on file of all 
these operations on each grower, including marketing records 
which are computerized. 

Market Regulations 

The marketing board operates three auction exchanges. They 
are located at Tillsonburg, Delhi, and Aylmer. Activities are 
coordinated from a central office in Tillsonburg. 

Marketing regulations are established by the board before 
each season. A grower must meet the requirements of these 
regulations before his tobacco will be accepted at the auction 
exchanges. 

The first requirement, when preparing the crop for sale, is 
that farmers must sort tobacco to remove green, red, dark or 
nondescript leaves and package it into bales weighing approxi- 
mately 55 pounds, wrapped in kraft paper, and marked on two 
sides with kiln number and leaf color. 

The farmer must notify the board when he has a quarter 
of his crop prepared for market. The notices from farmers are 
filed in the control office according to postmark date, and when 
the market opens growers filing first get shipping order first. 

Delivering Tobacco 

Producers deliver their tobacco to the auction exchange 
designated by the marketing board in five regular shipments as 
follows: 

First shipment, 10 percent of estimated weight of crop; 
second, third and fourth shipments, 25 percent each; and fifth 
shipment, 15 percent. The grower is notified several days in ad- 
vance as to the specific day his shipment is to be received and 
sold. 

When the grower arrives at the exchange his tobacco is un- 
loaded and classified. Bales are placed on pallets according to 
classification, up to 30 bales per pallet. This makes up a sales 



unit. The pallets are weighed and placed in rows on the display 
floor, where they are graded by board graders, using one repre- 
sentative bale for inspection. The board graders are followed by 
government inspectors who make final checks of the grade. 

After the tobacco has been graded the weight tickets of each 
row of tobacco are carried, in order of display, to the office where 
IBM operators catalogue the tobacco being offered for sale ac- 
cording to position number, bill number, grade, number of bales 
and total pounds. A catalogue is made for each row of pallets. 

Each buying company is given copies of the catalog. Com- 
pany officials then proceed to the display floor to inspect the 
tobacco. As they do so they indicate on the catalog the amount 
that the company is willing to pay for each unit of tobacco 
offered. 

The catalog is then carried to the company's buyer in the 
auction room. He does the actual bidding. Usually the buyer 
never sees the tobacco he is purchasing prior to the sale. 

Auction Procedure 

The mechanical auctioneer is a Dutch auction clock system. 

An employee of the auction starts the clock at a figure five 
to 15 cents above the price that the grade of tobacco has been 
bringing. As the clock hand moves downward counter-clockwise, 
the price decreases until such time as one of the buyers pushes 
a button to stop the clock. 

Each buyer is seated at a desk equipped with a button. When 
he pushes the button and stops the clock, his identifying number 
shows up on the clock board. 

An attendant announces the number of the buyer and the 



u 




THE ONTARIO FLUE-CUIED 
TOBACCO GKOWERS AUCTION EXCHANGE 




Fronl of Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Auction Exchange. There 
are three identical facilities located at Tillsonburg, Aylmer and Delhi. 




A Canadian display floor with pallets containing up to 30 bales. Each row 
is catalogued; then company officials inspect each pallet as shown 
above, making notes of the price they would pay for each lot of in- 
terest. This information is then sent to buyer in Dutch Clock Auction 
Room. 




Farmer's pack barn showing his crop already graded, baled and stacked 
waiting for shipping orders from the Marketing Board. The symbols (3B) 
seen on front of the bales indicate that it is the third curing and Bright 
grade. 



price bid for the unit. He does this over a loudspeaker so that 
growers waiting in an adjoining room can keep informed about 
the sales. 

After a row or a catalog of tobacco has received bids, the 
farmer has 30 minutes to decide if he will accept or reject the 
bids on his offerings. 

Rejected Bids 

When a bid is rejected the tobacco is moved to the re-code 
area of the exchange where it is given a new weight bill and re- 
offered for sale the same day. If the farmer rejects the second bid, 
the tobacco must be taken home with the understanding it may- 
be offered again with a future shipment. 

Records of each farmer's sale in all three exhanges are for- 
warded daily to the central office on IBM cards. There, checks 
are made out by computer and mailed to growers the following 
day. 

The auction sales begin at 9 o'clock each morning, Monday 
through Friday, and generally close around 3 p.m. Daily offer- 
ings in each exchange average around 850,000 pounds. 

The number of units sold per day at each exchange ranges 
between 1,500 and 1,750 the rate being approximately 6V2 units 
offered per minute. 

Each exchange employs about 200 people during the market- 
ing season. The employees are paid wages ranging from $1.85 
to $2.00 (Canadian currency) per hour. 

Cost of Program 

Where does the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Marketing 
Board get the funds needed to provide facilities and operate all 
phases of the tobacco program from production controls through 
the marketing process? 

The funds are provided through a one cent fee deducted from 
the proceeds of the sale of each pound of tobacco. 

Under the Ontario Farm Products Marketing Act, the board 
is authorized to assess all licensed growers up to one cent per 
pound on all tobacco marketed. This fee provides the marketing 
board approximately $2 million a year in revenues which have 
proven sufficient to provide the land, buildings and cover all 
operational costs. 



North Carolina Flue-Cured Crops 
1919-1969* 







Yield Per 








Year 


No. Acres 


Acre 


Produdion 


Value 


Average 






(Pounds) 


(1,000 lbs.) 


(1,000 Dollars) 


Price 


1919 


521,000 


612 


319,276 


$157,340 


$49.30 


1920 


621,900 


681 


423,703 


88,271 


20.80 


1921 


414,900 


594 


246,540 


60,402 


24.50 


1922 


444,000 


611 


271,170 


74,572 


27.50 


1923 


544,300 


728 


396,354 


81,998 


20.70 


1924 


473,500 


585 


276,819 


62,597 


22.60 


1925 


536,200 


696 


373,352 


83,756 


22.40 


1926 


546,700 


692 


378,274 


96,762 


25.60 


1927 


639,600 


755 


482,982 


100,414 


20.80 


1928 


712,400 


692 


493,132 


93,450 


19.00 


1929 


729,300 


665 


484,630 


89,470 


18.50 


1930 


768,000 


757 


581,200 


74,733 


12.90 


1931 


688,500 
462,500 


692 
624 


476,382 


42,024 


8.80 
12.10 


1932 


288,750 


34,949 


1933 


667,800 


794 


530,133 


85,530 


16.10 


1934 


486,500 


847 


412,055 


117,999 


28.60 


1935 


612,500 


635 


572,625 


116,418 


20.30 


1936 


591,000 


765 


451,975 


101,856 


22.50 


1937 


675,000 


883 


595,815 


143,058 


24.00 


1938 


603,500 


844 


509,470 


115,428 


22.70 


1939 


843,000 


964 


812,540 


123,893 


15.20 


1940 


498,000 


1,038 


516,835 


85,792 


16.60 


1941 


488,000 


928 


452,825 


132,291 


29.20 


1942 


539,000 


1,052 


566,810 


221,538 


39.10 


1943 


580,000 


935 


542,200 


219,074 


40.40 


1944 


684,000 


1,077 


736,990 


317,628 


43.10 


1945 


722,000 


1,100 


794,310 


349,148 


44.00 


1946 


802,000 


1,138 


912,970 


451,639 


49.50 


1947 


783,000 


1,139 


892,205 


374,513 


42.00 


1948 


594,000 


1,239 


739,380 


368,040 


49.80 


1949 


621,000 


1,178 


731,530 


352,508 


48.20 


1950 


640,000 


1,441 


858,140 


477,508 


55.60 


1951 


735,000 


1,331 


978,375 


523,358 


53.50 


1952 


735,000 


1,222 


898,090 


448,582 


49.90 


1953 


674,000 


1,235 


832,305 


447,076 


53.70 


1954 


686,000 


1,204 


889,490 


483,003 


54.30 


1955 


653,000 


1,499 


978,775 


520,845 


53.20 


1956 


579,000 


1,661 


961,495 


496,324 


51.60 


1957 


443,000 


1,469 


650,780 


358,442 


55.10 


1958 


429,000 


1,718 


736,855 


427,307 


58.00 


1959 


458,500 


1,533 


702,942 


407,055 


57.90 


1960 


457,500 


1,836 


839,870 


512,731 


61.10 


1961 


463,000 


1,797 


832,215 


541,468 


65.10 


1962 


483,000 


1,890 


912,810 


549,594 


60.20 


1963 


460,500 


1,999 


920,660 


535,622 


58.18 


1964 


416,000 


2,282 


949,450 


549,875 


57.90 


1965 


375,000 


1,840 


690,050 


442,796 


64.20 


1966 


409,500 


1,859 


761,360 


506,605 


66.50 


1967 


395,400 


2,071 


818,997 


523,809 


64.00 


1968 


350,500 


1,850 


648,533 


430,613 


66.45 


1969** 


377,500 


1,846 


696,768 


502,152 


72.10 



•Source: N. C. and USDA Crop Reporting Service. 
••Preliminary for 1969. » „, ^ j i 

Note: Since 1965, production is pounds produced and does not reflect pounds not 
sold or pounds carried forward to tlie next season. 

13 



State Marketing Summary 1969-1970 

Record high prices prevailed througliout the 1969 flue cured market 
season. The average price paid growers for the entire flue-cured crop 
was $72.13 per hundred pounds which is $5.66 per hundred pounds more 
than the 1968 crop average. Such a price increase resulted primarily from 
the improved quality produced by growers last year and a 3.6 percent 
increase in support price. A large portion of the 1969 crop was composed 
of the thin bodied leaf which is desired by companies in order to meet 
present day domestic and foreign consumer market demands. 

Volume increased slightly over 1968's low ebb but still did not match 
the quantities produced during the early sixties. Quantity appears to be 
restricted more by grower limitations than by poundage quota. Farmers 
produced 87 million pounds less than their allotment in 1969. 

Stabilization receipts for all flue-cured types decreased considerably 
as compared to the 1968 crop even though price support increased. A 
total of 9.2 percent of the 1969 producer sales went under government 
loan whereas 12.9 percent of the 1968 crop went to stabilization. The only 
area to show an increase in stabilization receipts for 1969 was the East- 
ern Belt. 

Burley producers did not share in the prosperity experienced by 
flue-cured growers during 1969. The burley crop was heavier than the 
previous 1968 crop and was of a less desirable quality. Burley growers 
received $5.23 less per hundred for the 1969 crop than for the 1968 crop. 

TYPE 13: The Industry-Wide Flue- Cured Marketing Committee 
recommended that the North Carolina Border Belt open its 1969 season 
three sales days after the South Carolina opening. However, North Caro- 
lina Border Belt warehousemen felt that their markets should open 
simultaneously with South Carolina markets as was the usual custom. So, 
with tobacco graders on hand under federal court order, N. C. Border 
Belt markets attempted to open with S. C. markets on July 23, 1969. 
But due to a lack of buying power, all markets closed after a few hours 
of operation. Border markets then officially opened on July 28, 1969, with 
full buying power, and some markets remained open until October 2, 
1969. 

Quality improved considerably over the 1968 crop especially in the 
desirable colors. Offerings contained larger proportions of lemon and 
orange grades and smaller quantities of immature and nondescript grades. 

Prices advanced to a record high level for the 1969 season. Increases 
of $2 to $7 occurred for straight grades of lemon and orange leaf while 
immature and nondescript grades advanced $7 to $15 per hundred above 
the 1968 season average. Farmers received an average of $72.71 which 
surpassed the 1968 average by $5.32 per hundred pounds. 

Total producer sales for the 1969 Border Belt market season were 
118,033,542 pounds returning growers $85,823,627 as compared to the 
1968 sales of 129,251,422 pounds returning $87,107,065. 

TYPE 12: The Eastern Belt began its season a week earlier in 1969. 
Eastern flue-cured markets opened August 19 and remained open in 
some areas for 48 days. A few small markets began closing as early as 



October 14 while larger markets continued operation tlirough Novem- 
ber 10. 

Quality of the 1969 offerings was superior to the 1968 crop. Much of 
the marketings consisted of thin bodied mature leaf with less variegated 
and nondescript being offered. 

Prices achieved new records in the Eastern Belt during 1969. Average 
prices for poor quaUty leaf increased $4 to $9 per hundred and good 
quality smoking leaf, cutters and lugs increased $1 to $2 per hundred 
above 1968's average. A large portion of the cutters and lugs failed to 
average above their support price. However, the overall Eastern Belt 
crop averaged $72.49 per hundred which is $4.83 per hundred greater than 
the previous crop average. 

Total producer sales the year were 313,475,282 pounds returning 
growers $227,243,152 whereas 287,009,702 pounds returned farmers $194,- 
193,390 in 1968. 

TYPE IIB; Middle Belt markets held opening sales on September 2. 
Some markets remained in operation for a period of 44 days, whereas 
a few one-set markets closed their season as early as October 15. 

Quality of 1969 Middle Belt offerings was far superior to the previous 
crop. Due to a favorable growing season, an unusually large percent of 
the offerings consisted of orange smoking leaf with less nondescript 
and unripe variegated leaf being sold. 

Prices advanced to a record level for the Middle Belt 1969 crop. 
Increases of $1 to $5 per hundred occurred in cutters, lugs, primings, 
smoking leaf and good quality leaf. Some leaf prices increased as much 
as $6 to $11 per hundred. Average price increase for all grades was 
$7.34 per hundred which raised the 1969 Middle Belt seasonal average to 
$71.52 per hundred. 

Gross producer sales for 1969 amounted to 111,647,113 pounds and 
returned farmers $79,847,256, whereas 106,603,657 pounds brought farmers 
$68,416,363 in 1968. 

TYPE 11 A: Old Belt phased in flue-cured auctions on September 2 
with nine sets of buyers — four of which were assigned to North Carolina. 
Winston-Salem received two sets of buyers. Stoneville and Roxboro each 
received one set of buyers. Other Old Belt markets opened September 16. 
Yadkinville, the Old Belt's newest market closed October 30. Final 
auctions for North Carolina flue-cured tobacco were held December 1 in 
Winston-Salem giving Old Belt markets 52 sales days. 

Quahty of 1969 Old Belt tobacco was exceptionally good. Offerings 
consisted of a large percentage of cutters and smoking leaf and less un- 
ripe variegated leaf. 

Prices were congruent with other flue-cured belts in that record 
breaking averages occun-ed throughout the season. Practically all grades 
increased as much as $1 to $6 per hundred with some grades advancing 
$6 to $22 per hundred pounds. N. C. Old Belt markets averaged $70.97 per 
hundred pounds for the entire season which was a $7.06 per hundred 
increase over 1968 crop returns. 

See Marketing Summanj 
Page 25 



>£ 



CM tr- coco M I 



COCD^CDCOCDtOC 



lOooiOMCDincDioinroooiocDinTt*.— iio 



CDCDCDCOCDCDCDCDCDCOCOCOCDCDCDCDCD 



C^OCOCMCOCO'^C- 
CMOSi— ICO(MCOOCO 
OOlEr-COC^COCOCO 

c<f o .-T T-T ci CO CO crT 



OrHCO-— I'^COD-CO 



cocDc<iirjTj^co[r-T:t^rf'(rocDmMcn(Mc--o 

'-HCDOOiOOC^-^CDCDOC^CTit^CDCOlOCO 

CD irf in CO CO •—* i^-"o'co cd'cm' cvf lO in cDaToT 

COO-'^'COCOi:— OlTt^OCOCOt^CDtr--^.— <co 
O^^CO OCT) O^O^CNl^CN ir- 01^0lTj<CDTj<Ir-cO 

t> CO of !>•' oT .-H in CO cd' t-'co co't-" co" co'co"!:-" 

^ -^ CO CO 1-H LO 



t> -^ 1— I CO -^ 1— t O T 



lOiOCDOCVJt-OCDOCD 



t-D-t-C^t^C^t^D- 



D-c^c-i:-i>-i>-i:^c^i>-D-i>-i:-r>i>r>t:^ir-c- 



T-H a: '^ c- CO ^ 1-1 CO m 



3 
O 

o 



D 
O 



Qtf 



5 SI'S 



CO CO »— I CO CM C75 C 
LOCOCOr-HOiCOC^OS 

5? CO -^"in c-^oTinai'co'" 
oicor-HCNicMt^csim 

Ij CM ^ lO o -^ '"1,'^ °^^ 

jr CO [>^i>^'^"i>-'"'^'"c 



CO eg CM CM 



W OCOiOCD-^-^-^CM 

pq .— I .— ( CD CM lO t> CO c— 

^ OlO-COCOTt^OSCOOi 

rj LtToOO C^'ctTcO CD in 



CM 'Tt^ O CM TJH CM CD 

t— O CO CD 02 in r~« 



CO'^OCOO.-HCOO 
OC-CM-^COCOCOC- 

COr-icOCO'-<i-HCOC<i 



CM 

r-* CM 

o 
U «l 

a< CO 
>^ 

E- 
Q 

u 

IX 

o 
u 

•4 



. — .. ^ ,,_,^-ui_>^iJujx.OCO'— tCOOiCO'^CM 

:OiC7:i~«cD<^i>-cooii:-05'— iinc^cocDOcn 
in co"^ -rr o ^"o'^'cM i-H Th cvf fo'co'in o'cm' 
cMcort^oincoi-H-^in-^cMCMCMinoscoco 

t>_CM^O O-^OO CD in 1>-^CD 1— t CO I> CD CO '^ '^^'^ 

co*"CT5"o"arco cd'co o'ctTcji cjj tr^ a^ Oir-^co 



J u_i -^3- "^j uj uj i-^ t-^i c^j 1— ' U3 u-i f-^j t— ' m (— 

301LnC0OC0CDC-'C— Tt^O'— ICDCOCD-— *in 

iT'-^'co -^"co in Tt^'c-* .-H ^"TtTo-C^io i^t-^ , 

30COCOCTlCOOCOinCOCOCMOiOSC3-^t 

g.— (.— (c-s i>-[>-CMCoinc^ .— ii-H, 



D-C-OO.-(C0t 
i-<C75^COCM_^CD.-tin[>^CTi_COCDCO^COOCO 

oo in of in 05' ^ o c3i ctT in .-H ci co' CM in co' co 
CM CO CO Tt^ in CO CO 05 CO ^ en 1-H ,-h 001 



H ^CO^COOO-^"5'MC3:)TfiCMCDOCM'^'<^Cp 

u 
pq 

iz; 

u 

H 



■^cDt^cococDCDCO-^incDcoc^ir-D-t-ino 
'— icoi-HCvicD-rt^cM.— ioinmoc35mmoi'^o 

,-H CSJ C^i CM .-H CM CM .-H CM CM O CM .-* CM CM CO C^' cd 



3WP 



o:)i>-OiCJ5COcoir-in 

CTSCDi— <C— C-CDCOCO 

oo-<^Ln^.— icoco 



CTiOincOCMCDCMCO 
COC— COCOCDCO'^CO 



Ir-OOOi-H"^CJ5COOCOCMCOtnOOCOOO'— < 
OOCOini^-CTJCOCD(3COCT5'-HCD-^[:-a:!OCM 
CD^O^CM CO CM^CO Oi ^ ^<^ CTS CO C75_CM 05 '^ -— < O 

in CO CO cfoi CO cd' CO o in in CO CD co'in in'o'cM 
coco^cD^in.— '■'^cMc-1— icocM^-^-^inco 
inincoinincqo:'— icocococ^'^^inc^OCTJCo 
CO co" CO OS OS CM*" in oD cji" cd 00 cj:' c-' cd' oJ o c--" 

.-I -^ CO CO t-i CO 



s ^ 



° °S o^ fc^ > -5 
F. <u c o.ti '^ 



3 o- 



■> o-a 



5^1=^^^ 






t^ O ™ 



i^£ °|'^-a.2o^S H 






■ [r-ioc^«— loooir-coco 



CDCDCDlOCOCDCDCDCOCO 



OlOt-COOO-^COCOOOCvl 



CDCO^COCDCDCDCDCOQD 



CO CO o 
D- lO 05 

CO CO c<i 



CD .-I 
CD lO 



t- .— I '^S^ D- Oi lO 

i:^ i-H CD LO CO (M 



t-HCSiT— *cococom-^a:tr- 



1 ^ CO 

rco CO t~^ co"c 



i-HCOOSOCO'-tC^CNtOCD 
lOCMCM-— ti— ico01C50:iCD 

CO c^ c^i o OS co^-^^os^-^^co 
CO ■^'o'-^'oi ^.— I in CO CO 

COCDC^'^CO'— ii— <uococo 

TtHCDO:ia:o_a;jCicoc-__io 
lo -*' CO lo cjT co' CD -"^ c-" 



C- (M CO 

csi lo in 

cdc-ioT 



CDD-t-COOtiCOI^-inCDO 



CDi— ICOtNCOCOCOi— iC<]CO 



CDtr-t-CDD-D-t-C-D-Ir- 



CDCDC^C—C-C^C^t-D-CD 



CDlO'^rHC^MCOt^CDCD 

inincocot>(M'*£>'-i'— ' 



CQ 



a:) I 



3 CS CO C~ CD CO CJl C- 



^ O 0:1 (M ■— t CO CSl^-^^^CJ^^M 

y cDCo 10 CO incD cdaTcD CO 



(M t-«,-i 1-1 



UTt^CDC^C^CD^OCDC--— I 
^ coc>omcococDi^-coco 
PC T— ( [^- -^ cq 0:1 ^^^^ '^ '^,'— 1 
^ csrio"'-H CO .-T fM'co L— "c-'o' 
ri cooiO'X'cococ^inoico 

'"T C^'-i-^iMiOC^lCSlCO 



t-hOCO'^COCSCDCOCDtJI 

coi-HCDOitMincDcoasco 

t-'^COCDO:)'— "'— lOiCD^C^ 

o c<r c-" cd' oT CO co' 1-H 01 CO 



Q C^ CD CD 1— < O <— < O '^ CD 

^ '^cot-.— (lOincDcsicoco 

A oicri.— <D-^cO'— I.— ii— lOo 

CDt-c-CDr-t-i^-D-tr-c— 



CDi-iOlCD.— 'C^CNl'^inCO 
CDCOCO-^m.— iCDCD'^CO 

cocoocDOiincDinoQi 
in co'in csrir-"cD''^'ai'--^ in 

-^CDCD-rTCOCOCDCOtMCO 



COOOCDCDCO'^COCO-^ 

mcooiOcr^oicDcoioio 

.-H ^ CO CO CD «-H CM (M "M^^rl. 

j'c-'cD Oi"co co'cm' cd cs] in 



-^ -^ CM -^ CO CM 

in o oi E^ CO "^ CO •— I CM 

in CO CO [r- t^ CO CO Oi CD 



COOlCMO'-HOOOi-i'^ 
COCDt^r-t-tr-t-ET-t-CD 



J^ incM --H 

*^-' CO CO --H 

[J rMCo"-^" 

p 

_ oc-o 

O .-Trt'co" 
t\ en ■* en 

*-* CD CSl CO 



H 


■!)< 


(N 


U 


CM 


C- 


« 


1 '" 


eg 


1 in 








►- 






u 






ij 






cc 






D 


^ 




M 


m 


:om 




COOiCD 




CD 


CD CO 



r-HOioitnof-HCMcooi-^ 

■^COCDCO-— <"^CMCD00O 



CM --< —I i-H 



commoT-HOCDCMCTso 

"TOSO-^OCOCOCTjCDCD 



CD C- CD CD CM in C 



T3 2 CO o ra cu-S H fs 0) 

< u Q H fo III hJ O w ^ 



co_aj 



rao 






3 H H 



> OJ 0) 

x; o 



Summary Of N. C. Dealer And 
Warehouse Resales— 1969 



Belt 



Border Belt 

Dealer 1,425,630 

Warehouse 3,608,883 

Eastern Belt 

Dealer 1,912,881 

Warehouse 5,789,361 

Middle Belt 

Dealer 1,031,852 

Warehouse 3,721,315 

Old Belt 

Dealer 1,012,074 

Warehouse 5,255,417 

Total Flue-Cured Resales 23,757,413 

Burley Belt 

Dealer 387,896 

Warehouse 1,322,180 

Total Burley Resales 1,710,076 1,150,820 



Producer And Gross Sales Of Flue-Cured 
Tobacco By States— 1969 

Producer Sales Gross Sales 

Slale Pounds Average Pounds Average 

N. C 639,996,078 $72.13 663,753,491 $71.97 

Va 127,529,479 71.81 131,764,478 71,68 

S. C 136,794,060 72.80 143,330,127 72.69 

Ga 126,325,847 73.23 133,877,856 73.12 

Fla 20,389,892 74.45 22,266,739 74.39 



917,949 


1.16 


2,487,168 


2.93 


1,193,586 


0.60 


3,878,913 


1.80 


687,724 


0.87 


2,536,070 


3.20 


662,842 


0.98 


3,677,905 


5.10 


16,042,157 


3.58 


255,983 


2.01 


894,837 


6.85 



Total 1,051,036,356 $72.36 1,094,992,691 $72.22 



Flue-Cured Movement In And Out 
Of North Carolina 



state 


N. C. Tobacco Sold 
(Pounds 
1969 


Out of Stale 
1968 


Out of State Tobacco Sold in N. C. 

(Pounds) 

1969 196S 


Va. 


31,390,252 




27,930,555 

20,775,378 

17,442,808 

1,017,950 


6,830,018 

11,647,553 


5,132,744 


S. C 


.20,687,131 
19,454,739 


11,575,073 


Ga 


51,620 
9,032 
1,038 


154,220 


Fla 

Ala 


971,078 


7,716 
10,570 


Total 


.72,503,200 




67,166,691 


18,539,261 


16,880,323 



Burley Tobacco Movement In And Out 
Of North Carolina 



State 



N. C. Tobacco Sold Out of Slate 

(Pounds) 

1969 1968 



Out of State Tobacco Sold in N. C. 

(Pounds) 
1969 1968 



Tenn 3,783,914 

Va 7,550 

W. Va — 

Ga — 

S. C — 



3,270,868 
9,042 



435,806 

1,057,528 

26,278 

41,716 

1,640 



441,298 

946,370 

29,054 

45,836 

1,784 



Total 3,791,464 



3,279,910 



1,562,968 



1,464,342 



Flue-Cured Stabilization Receipts 
By Types And States— 1969 



Producer Stabilization Percentage 

Slate Typ5 Sales (lbs.) Receipts (lbs.) Stab. Received 



Va. Total IIA 

N. C IIA 

N. C IIB 

N. C 12 

N. C 13 

N. C. Total 11-13 

S. C. Total 13 

Ga. Total 14 

Fla. Total 14 

Total All Types 



127,529,479 


16,242,104 


12.7 


96,840,141 
111,647,113 
313,475,282 
118,033,542 


7,877,715 
14,879,622 
37,075,606 

8,400,756 


8.1 
13.3 
11.8 

7.1 


639,996,078 


68,233,699 


10.7 


136,794,060 


4,820,870 


3.5 


126,325,847 


6,891,671 


5.5 


20,389,892 


1,007,893 


4.9 


1,051,035,356 


97,196,237 


9.2 



Burley Stabilization Receipts 
For N. C. And Total U. S. -1969-70 



stabilization Percentage 

Receipts (lbs.) Stab. Received 



N. C 31 17,594,430 2,473,562 14.1 

U. S. Total 31 580,800,875 158,660,468 27.3 



N. C. Burley Tobacco Allotments* 
1970 



County 



Alleghany 552 218.00 9 

Ashe 2,570 1,023.07 3 

Avery 243 106.84 10 

Brunswick 1 -09 ^^ 

Buncombe 2,858 1,333.57 2 

Burke 14 4.47 21 

Caldwell 19 6.65 20 

Cherokee 190 66.91 14 

Clay 224 83.34 12 

Cleveland 8 3.09 22 

Davidson 2 0.89 27 

Gaston 1 0.50 28 

Graham 661 285.14 8 

GranviUe 1 0.12 30 

Haywood 1,834 888.57 5 

Henderson 108 41.18 16 

Iredell 3 1.18 24 

Jackson 274 102.74 11 

McDowell 70 24.77 18 

Macon 238 75.29 13 

Madison 2,730 1,903.74 1 

MitcheU 929 453.13 7 

Polk 5 1.07 25 

Rutherford 52 21.31 19 

Stokes 2 0.34 29 

Surry 7 0.94 26 

Swain 202 65.60 15 

Transylvania 72 26.70 17 

Watauga 1.658 704.65 6 

Wilkes 6 1.60 23 

Yancey 1,724 943.60 4_ 

STATE TOTAL 17,258 8,389.09 1-31 



•Source: USDA Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service. 



CDi-Hi-HC^OtDOCOi— *OiU:3C3C>^[>Ir--COa5'^'^C^O'rt^lOOCO"^t^t-CDC^incOlOCT)( 






CD CD D- Ol <X) CO £> 



jOicoi-HCOcorococo-^c-masco-— ic^imc^c 

(X3 t~ 'R,'^ CO in CM O O:' ^^^ ^'~' COCOCDOiTjHrJHcOOSC-t— o^c 

t-T ■^"t-'co c-'cD'oi"-^ r-^cToT cD'co'"^"^''i>-'"c^'"cD'"aroi"c<rc4""' 

1-H CO ,— I -<:jH coco CM csi CD CO -— i o CO ^ c?5 CD c::i CM m 

OS "^^ c^ '^^ ^ ^^ *^^ "^^ <^. °^^ ■^^ "^^ t^. t-^ ^„ <^ *^_ <^. 

1-H co" ^ i-Tco o' in t-H t> lo oi"i> t> oTcm" 



COi-Hr 



CM 



•-I CM 



Oi t^ C^k ■ 

'^'oTict' 



CD'-HD-^I^OOai'Tt^'^CM^tr^'^CTsOit^I^COLni-HCMCM'-iCO'— iD-CMOlEr-Oitr-Oinc^lf 

i-HCMcocomasc^osc^ir-cjiinoincMioinoiCMcoi— icot-c^inT— (CDcoinococ^cDinc 

t-^ojc^'aicdaico ' '.-^oiTJ^coLnLnc6 'cgT-iin "cd^o'crJc-^cdcgo^cDr^ciLriaJO 
in CM CD CO C3 o c^ ^ 1— I o CO -^ '^ CD cq ^ Oi c- c- co c^ cm co cs]inocoooe< 

CO in ^ CD CD csi .— ( in i— i co cm -^ t— ( co in co cm cd co c: o co cm Tt^ co ^ .-h « 

•^"i-T ctT^'i^co'" i-Tcd CO -^c^LO cO'-M-^'^coczTinaT r-To'cTTinc^ 



1— iLnc::iOcoLncDcocoin-^CDcs]CDir-'^_4H050og[r-cocor-iincMOC35';jHO[>ocor-ic 

■^CQCOCO-^i-HCOCOi-H^OCOmcOCMinS^CO'— tCOCD^^COOSCOCOCOcOCM^in"'"'"" 
rHC^COOC-'^'— It— COt^CO'-H.— iin-^^OS-^CD C0_a5C0_C0_r-»C0C0C0C0'^O 

CO t-^cg in oc-'o o t-^tr^co'co t~-^t— " cm'co co 
in CO lO 05 as in o m t- <—( coco c^ o co 

CMCD'^OI'^— -- ^ ^^_ 



CO 1-H co' CO i-H in 



CO 



COOSCOCOr-tCOCOCOCD-^OOC^icC 

as' os' c-" co' co" co' in •^' -— T as' cm lO co" ir 
in c^ ic CO CM c^ '^ coinoD-coc* 

o^co^^co^co^cM^os^i-H CO osiers c:s co e 
^'.-T co'^'co'in CD r-'aTi-rooc 

CM — I r-( ^ ^ ^ c» 



COCO'^'^CO'-iOCDCMCMCDCOOSC^inrr-CO'-iCOCOCD^'-tin'^D-TjHOOSCMCOC^ICMC- 

^cMi-H'^CTscTS'— i^ocoir-'^crsi>cococ^cDcM'^oincJSi:^CM'— io.-icoi>t>'-imt> 
cMi-HCMco-^cMcd * 'cDcococTscM'-HO 'ocD'^' 'incdoirii^osc6coint-^-^-<:j^"c^ 



as CO i-H in CO CO in 

t^ 0_CO CD in CJS CD 

co' T-T c-" ■<:**' in csT 



in CO o in r- as CO CO m ^ . , _, 

CM CSl CO O CD CM t> T-< I>- CM CO CO . 

CDOS-^OSC^lCOr-H CMD-CDCMI>< 

CM C^'CMCTS'CO'OS" — '-'- " -^ 



cocoir-cocMc-in.-HT-HcocMt-tr-cMcocO'— I.— icOTf^.-Hir-int^cMO^'*!— ic-CDCMi-Hinc 

"scsiinascD-^c-oocooin.— lOr- ir^-o-^cocDOin.— f-^coc3ii>cMOrHCMin.-«ioe 

""" " C^ICOCTSOi— ic— < 



<^ d^-S 5 5 






Si£5 






3 ■« 

■c oJ fe Li • 
> c o to 



^-ji-Q i-<r-c "J--^ C'*-' ^ cd '^ 

^^ a S oJ ™ 2 3ra M ffl rt c3 ra55;i! o K 3 ffl oj ca D 3-5-3 u « «i , ^.^ 
■<<<pqmcqpQpquouuuoouuouoQQQQQWfefoOOOC)OW! 






H cd" OD Co" CD CST i-H of CtT oT lo" t-T LO -^' CO lO CO O" O CO cm' Cd" D-' ^ O' C-" 1-H ^^ CN ^ CO 



lnlncocolOOTt^l0^^csocOl^qcoi:-ococO'*^coco-*[:-T-^oc2^'£^^^CDO^ncoT^ 
Oio^cDl-H(^ql-^(^^[:>Tt^coT-HLO•^r-^t^^ncolO^^-lncDCDI:^^[:^LOcO'^^-c^c^•--^cO'^^ 



:.ocoo:tcocD(M"^cz)CDaiCDC^cot 



— u.,w. ^^^^. ^ ^.-Ic-icoc^'coLnOLOcocsjcocDOco-— ii— icsii:-o:.c<icDa^ 

■CDOOC^COLOC£JLOCOCO-<:t*COCNllOlOl^COU^CNlinCDCOC^OOTt^.-H-^CSlCDCOt-H^C^ 

'cococo.— tLOCDco-— t<or-<M(Mrj^^c>ocococ-gco .-H_in o co^cnjcd^lo c^i-h c3 co co^'^^^o ir~^ 

cic-f --H oT-^'cO^oicO --H 'T^^'^lO lO CO 1-H CO* cdc^' CO (N'" of (M" CO '-' o'oTcO t>-'lO CM -— t coir- 



(M --It 



■t-mCMCDC^i— •COCOCO'^OlC^lCOCOlOlOE 



__ -LOCOCpCDC^CDCDC^it:^ 

■< (M CD 1-4 LO CD 1— ( C— CO LO -^ in 
-C-^'^lOOCOCO'— ii-HCOCOCN] 



^co'-'CDcomco^'-HC 



■ CO CO C- ^ CSi '^ i-( ^ 05 
_jjO:),— (CDCOCMC^CDCSimcOCTiCOCDO^CDC^CD 
COCJim-^CD COUOCOOi a3_-^_^CD^C<J_-^_^cri_C-^C73_ 

: ,-4" ^' ^ i>r o 



OD"^-— I'^COCTjCOtM-^D^ "^i— <•rJ^LOOCOI 

.—ICO CO '-I CM .-H .— I .— I CM 



^LOCOi— ICOCOCDt-'— <lO-^CT5iOC00:0:!'^C0CDCDCDC 



-CDCOC-Jir-COCOO-rt^CDCDCMCOCM'— iCOC 



CM --H ' 



lO 1— I r-H .-I rHC^ 



.OfMcoascocvJO-— iCJ^oocDcoincoT^cDc^iOi 

OlCOCMCOOTi-HCOCDUDOCOOOO.— <-^CMCOCS]C:iCOOCJia5I>'COr-HCSlCO 
•^COmo: CM[r-a5COCOC^CDCDCX)C^05_ ^^"^ ^'R,'^^^'^^^ '-^^'^ ""l.^ 

,-4',-H"cM"'-r -^CM lO c^'corHcoi-T CO csTcM 



[>COO.— I.— iCJ^JD-Omt-TtiCMiOCDCOCMt^l 
OTt^OCDOSCDI ~ '" " 

CO t- CO CO CO eg c 



o o 

WW 









North Carolina Burley Crops 
1928- 1969* 



Year 


No. Acres 


Yield Per 

Acre 
(Pounds) 


Produclion 
(1,000 lbs.) 


Value 
(1,000 Dollars) 


Average 
Price 


1928 


3,600 


650 


2,340 


$ 690 


$29.50 


1929 


5,500 


730 


4,015 


863 


21.50 


1930 


7,200 


750 


5,400 


853 


15.80 


1931 


7,100 


710 


5,041 


464 


9.20 


1932 


6,500 


735 


4,778 


726 


15.20 


1933 


9,200 


785 


7,222 


715 


9.90 


1934 


5,500 


870 


4,785 


809 


17.50 


1935 


5,200 


925 


4,810 


1,025 


21.30 


1936 


6,000 


900 


5,400 


2,095 


38.80 


1937 


9,000 


975 


8,775 


1,787 


21.40 


1938 


8,600 


900 


7,740 


1,308 


16.90 


1939 


8,100 


1,070 


8,667 


1,447 


16.70 


1940 


6,500 


1.050 


6,825 


1,242 


18.20 


1941 


6,200 


1,075 


6,665 


2,093 


31.40 


1942 


6,600 


1,150 


7,590 


3,211 


42.30 


1343 


8,500 


1,225 


10,412 


5,102 


49.00 


1944 


12,000 


1,390 


16,680 


8,157 


48.90 


1945 


13,00 


1,500 


19,500 


7,568 


38.30 


1946 


9,800 


1,475 


14,455 


5,999 


41.50 


1947 


9,600 


1,560 


14,976 


6,335 


42.30 


1948 


10,300 


1,680 


17,304 


8,012 


46.30 


1949 


10,800 


1,440 


15,552 


6,750 


43.40 


1950 


10,500 


1,7C0 


17,850 


9,175 


51.40 


1951 


12,200 


1,750 


21,350 


11,572 


54.20 


1952 


12,000 


1,680 


20,160 


9,818 


48.70 


1953 


11,400 


1,800 


20,520 


11,019 


53.70 


1954 


12,700 


1,920 


24,384 


12,680 


52.00 


1955 


9,800 


1,900 


18,620 


10,651 


57.20 


1956 


9,400 


1,850 


17,390 


10,747 


61.80 


1957 


9,600 


1,975 


18,960 


11,073 


58.40 


1958 


9,300 


2,000 


18,600 


11,978 


64.40 


1959 


9,800 


2,060 


20,188 


11,426 


56.60 


1960 


9,500 


1,940 


18,430 


12.016 


65.20 


1961 


10,400 


2,090 


21,736 


14,346 


66.00 


1962 


11,000 


2,185 


24,035 


14,421 


60.00 


1933 


11,000 


2,285 


25,135 


13,573 


54.00 


1964 


9,700 


2,165 


21,000 


12,054 


57.40 


1965 


8,900 


2,030 


18,067 


12,159 


67.30 


1966 


7,900 


2,320 


18,328 


12,371 


67.50 


1967 


7,800 


2,010 


15,678 


11,037 


70.40 


1968 


7,900 


2,385 


18,842 


13,868 


73.60 


1969** 


7,900 


2,450 


19,355 


13,258 


68.50 



•Source: N. C. and USDA Crop Reporting Service. 
••Preliminary for 1969. 



State Marketing Summary 1969-1970 

(Continued from page 15) 

Gross 1969 producer sales for the Old Belt totaled 96,840,141 pounds 
bringing farmers $68,725,701 compared with 1968 when 84,508,739 pounds 
sold for $54,011,509. 

TYPE 31: North Carolina Bur ley markets began auctions November 
24 and continued operation for 21 sales days. The three North Carolina 
markets — AsheviUe, Boone and West Jefferson closed January 15. 

Burley markets failed to maintain the record breaking price trend 
established by flue-cured markets during 1969. Prices declined $2 to $10 
per hundred in most grades with the greatest decrease occurring in low 
quality heavy bodied grades. Some choice and fine grades of lugs and 
flyings had a $1 per hundred increase in support price which resulted 
in a $1 per hundred higher average for those particular grades. 

Price decline in the Burley Belt was associated with crop quality. 
QuaUty of the 1969 Burley offerings was inferior to the 1968 crop. The 
1969 marketings contained a much larger amount of red and green heavy 
leaf and smaller amounts of medium to thin bodied tan leaf. 

Gross producer sales for North Carolina Burley markets totaled 
17,594,430 pounds averaging $68.31 per hundred pounds, returning farm- 
ers $12,018,269 as compared to the 1968 crop of 16,436,486 pounds that sold 
for $12,087,992 and averaged $73.54 per hundred pounds. 



North Carolina Tobacco Warehouses And Operators 
By Belts And Markets — 1969 

BORDER BELT 

Chadbourn (one set buyers) 

Jimmy Green Whse. — Jimmy Green 
Producers — Jack W. Garrett, Crickett Garrett 

Clarkton (one set buyers) 

New Clarkton— Maynard Talley, Cecil Hartley 
Bright Leaf — Jimmy Green 

Fair Bluff (one set buyers) 

Powell— A. H. Powell, B. A. Powell 
Riverside — Aaron Parrish, Cliff Stephens 

Planters — Randolph Currin, B. W. Currin, C. W. Shaw, S. Lawrence, 
H. E. and H. B. Dunn 

Fairmont (four sets buyers) 

Chambers, Leggett & Garrett — E. J. Chambers, Leggett & Garrett Co. 
Davis-Mitchell-Planters — Harry Mitchell, Jack Mitchell, G. F. 

Roy star, Daniel Morris, Major Meadows, W. L. Gregory 
Holliday-Frye— E. H. Frye, J. W. & J. M. Holliday 
Square Deal— W. G. Bassett, C. L. Smith 
Star Carolina— W. M. Puckett, A. M. Best 
Liberty Twin States— P. R. Floyd, Jr., R. J. Harris, Bill Sheets, 

Clarence Joyce 
Big Brick— A. W. McDaniel, A. D. Lewis, Jr. 

Fayetteville (one set buyers) 

Big Farmers— P. L. Campbell, A. R. Talley, Sr., A. R. Talley, Jr., Don 

Talley 
Planters — Joe W. Stephenson, J. C. Adams 

Lumberton (three sets buyers) 

Carolina — J. L. Townsend, Sr. & Jr., J. E. Johnson, Jr., Sam Dunn 
Smith-Dixie — Cecil Thompson, Leslie Hall, Jack Pate 
Hedgpeth— R. A. Hedgpeth, E. H. Collins, Albert Thornton 
Liberty — H. D. Goode, R. H. Livermore, Frank White 
Star — D. T. Stephenson, Hogan Teater, Russell Teater 
Cooperative — C. E. McLaurin, Mgr. 

Tabor City (one set buyers) 

R. C. Coleman Co.— R. C. Coleman, Sr., Mrs. Harriet Sikes 
Planters — Don Watson, Mgr. 

Whiteville (three sets buyers) 

Gray & Neal— A. Dial Gray, J. L. Neal 
Crutchfield— G. E. & R. W. Crutchfield 
Lea's Big Dixie — Wm. Townes Lea, Louie Love 
Liberty— J. W. Hooks, I. A. Barefoot & Sons 
Moore's— C. C. Mason, C. F. Jeffcoat 
Nelson's — John H. Nelson, Jim Smith 
Planters— A. O. King, Jr., Cliff Stephens 
Smith's — Ernest Smith, Joe T. Smith 

26 



EASTERN BELT 

Ahoskie (one set buyers) 

Basnight No. 1-2-3— L. L. Wilkens, Sr. & Jr.. H. G. Veazey, H. Jenkins 
Farmers 1 & 2— W. M. Odoms, Pierce & Winborne, J. L. Morris 

Clinlon (one set buyers) 

Carolina— L. D. Herring, C. J. Strickland, N. L. Daughtry 
Ross — Clarence Kirven, Jr., W. K. Beech 

Dunn — (one set buyers) 

Planters— Leland Lee, J. M. Smothers 

Big Four Whse. — Tom Smothers, Jack Calhoun, Norman Hardee 

Farmville (two sets buyers) 

Bell's— R. A. Bell & Bros. 

Fountain & Monk No. 1— John F. Fountain, J. I. Oakley 

Fountain & Monk No. 2 — John F. Fountain, J. I. Oakley 

Planters & Prewits — Chester Worthington, W." O. Newell, B. S. 

Correll 
Lee's — Gordon Lee 

Goldsboro (one set buyers) 

Carolina— S. G. Best, D. V. Smith, D. Price 

Farmers — Robert Lynch 

Big Brick — J. R. Musgrave 

Victory — Richard Gray, Clarence Whitley 

Greenville (five sets buyers) 

Cannon's — W. T. Cannon, Carlton Dail 

Farmers— W. Arthur Tripp, T. P. Thompson, Harold Watson, 

Jack Warren 
Star-Planters— B. B. Sugg, Harding Sugg 
Keel— J. A. & J. B. Worthington, Fenner Allen 
New Independent — Bob CuUifer, Tom Andrews, Jr. 
Raynor-Forbes-Clark — Noah Raynor, A. A. Forbes, Billy Clark 
Harris-Rogers — R. E. Rogers 
New Carolina — Laddie Avery, Larry Hudson 

Kinston (four sets buyers) 

Farmers — John Jenkins, Sr. & Jr. 

Knott's 1 & 2 — Graham Knott, Billy Brewer 

New Dixie — John Jenkins, Sr. & Jr., Lee Jenkins 

New Central — Bill Herring, Bill King 

H & H — Dempsey Hodges, Virgil Harper 

Banner — John Heath, Kirby Loftin 

Brooks — Roger & Fred Brooks 

Central— Bill Herring, BiU King 

Robersonville (one set buyers) 

Grays-Red Front-Central— J. H. Gray, Jack Sharpe, C. R. Gray, 

James E. Gray 
Planters — H. T. Highsmith, E. G. Anderson, Frank Everett, H. H. 

Worsley 



Rocky Mount (four sets buyers) 

Cobb & Carlton— W. E. Cobb, Jr. & J. C. Carlton 

Mangum — Roy M. Phipps 

Planters — S. S. Edmondson 

Smith's — James D. Smith, Sr. & Jr. 

Works— R. J. Works, Jr., A. B. Raynor 

Peoples — Guy Barnes, Gene Simmons, James Walker 

Farmers — J. Holt Evans, Joe W. Coleman 

Fenners — J. B. Fenner 

Smithfield (two sets buyers) 

Farmers-Stephenson Riverside — Gilbert Stephenson, N. L. Daughtry, 

Bill Kennedy 
Big Planters — Joe Stephenson, Jerry Stephenson, Frank B. Skinner 
Gold Leaf— R. A. Pearce, Sr. & Jr. 
Wallace — Lawrence, Bobby & Larry Wallace 

Tarboro (one set buyers) 

Clark 1 & 2— J. F. Wilson, Jr. & R. L. Dunn 
Farmers 1 — Walter Walker 
Farmers 2 — Walter Walker 
Victory — W. V. Leggett 

Wallace (one set buyers) 

Blanchard & Farrior — O. C. Blanchard, W. H. Farrier, R. H. Lanier 

Hussey — Joe Bryant 

Sheffield's— John Sheffield, Homer M. Boney, Jr. 

Farmers — H. G. Perry 

Washington (one set buyers) 

Sermon's — W. J. Sermon, Harry L. Roberts 
Talley— W. G. Talley 
Hassell — Malcolm P. Hassell 

Wendell (one set buyers) 

Liberty-Farmers — H. H. & Berdon Eddins 
Northside — Graham Dean, Bill Sanders 
Banner — C. P. (Pete) Southerland 

Williamston (one set buyers) 

Rogers — Urbin Rogers, Leland Barnhill, Russell Rogers 
New Dixie — C. Fisher Harris, J. Elmo Lilley 

Wilson (five sets buyers) 

Big Dixie — W. C. Thompson, Buck Edmondson 

Wainwright — George L. Wainwright, Sr. & Jr. 

Centre Brick— S. M. Cozart, W. H. Cozart HI, F. M, Eagles 

Growers Cooperative — Clifford Aycock, Mgr. 

New Planters— W. C. Smith, R. T." Smith, Jr. 

Smith — S. Grady Deans, John F. Deans 

Bob's & Clark's- C. R. Clark 

Liberty— C. B. Renfro 

Windsor (one set buyers) 

Planters 1 & 2— C. B. & B. U. Griffin, Dave Newsome 
Farmers — Bill Davis, Norman Swain 

Vanceboro (Direct Buying Station) 

Cleve's Buying Station — Bill Cleves 



MIDDLE BELT 
Aberdeen (one set buyers) 

New Aberdeen— Cecil Moore, J. T. Worthington, Bobby Oldham 
Planters — W. Fentriss Phillips 
Hardee's— Hugh T. Hardee 
Farmers — William Maurer 
Carthage (one set buyers) 

McConnells— E. C. Layton, Earl J. Ennis 
Victory — E. C. Layton, Earl J. Ennis 
New Farmers— Bill Carter, Sr. & Jr. 
Durham (three sets buyers) 

Liberty— Wallcer Stone, Sr. & Jr. 

Roycroft-Mangum— J. K. Roycroft, Randolph Currm, J. Cumn, Jr. 
Star— W. W. Cozart, W. L. Currin, A. L. Carver 
Farmers-Planters— J. M. Talley, Bob Dale, Sam Mangum 
EUerbe (one set buyers) 
Farmers — Guy Sutton 
Ellerbe Whse. — Noble Wilson 

Richmond County— W. H. Rummage, Ashton Richardson, J. R. 
Brinond 
Fuquay-Varina (two sets buyers) 

New Deal— Dan Talley, Dan Brisson, Arthur Talley 
Gold Leaf— J. W. Dale, Waverly Aiken 
Carolina— C. E. Knott, E. E. Clayton 
Roberts — Joe Roberts 
Henderson (two sets buyers) 

Moore's Big Banner— A. H. Moore, C. E. Jeffcoat 
Carolina— J. S. Royster, F. J. Jackson 
Farmers — W. J. Alston, Jr., Dave Bowling 

High Price— C. B. Turner, R. E. Tanner, R. E. Fleming, S. P. Flemmg 
Liberty 1 & 2— George T. Robertson, S. E. Southerland 
Ellington— F. H. Ellington & John Ellington 
Alston's— W. J. Alston, Jr., Dave Bowling 
Big Dollar— M. L. Hight, James H. O'Brien 
Louisburg (one set buyers) 

Big Franklin— S. T. & H. B. CottreU 
Ford's — Charlie Ford 

Friendly Four — James Speed, Gus McGhee 
Oxford (two sets buyers) 

Banner-Mitchell — David Mitchell 

Fleming 1 & 2— D. T. Currin, Sr. & Jr., F. O. Finch 

Farmers-Mangum — Julian Adcock, S. B. Knott 

Johnson-High Price— C. R. Watkins, C. R. Watkins, Jr., T. J. Currm, 

J. C. Hamme 
Owen 1 & 2— W. L. Gregory, G. P. Royster, M. A. Goode, Sam W. 

Watkins, John S. Watkins, Jr., C. B. Wilkins 
Yeargin-Granville— R. W. Crews, W. W. Yeargin 
Sanford (one set buyers) 

Twin City— W. M. Carter, T. W. Mansfield, Jimmy Mansfield 
Morgan's — Jimmy Morgan 

Castleberry's— C. N. CastlebeiTy, Jr., R. F. Castleberry 
Warrenton (one set buyers) 
Boyd's — B. W. Currin, Jr. 

Centre— M. P. Carroll, E. W. Radford, E. M. Moody 
Farmers — E. G. Tarwater 

Thompson — C. E. Thompson, M. P. Edwards, Jr. 
Currin's 1 & 2— C. W. Currin 

29 



OLD BELT 
Burlington (one set buyers) 

Carolina — H. L. Perkins 

Coble — N. C. Newman, Joe Robertson 

Farmers — Bill McCauley, Glenn McCray 
Greensboro (one set buyers) 

Greensboro Tob. Whse. Co. — R. C. Coleman, Jr., Mgr. 

Guilford Tob. Whse.— J. R. & J. E. Pell 
Madison (one set buyers) 

New Brick — S. F. Webster, Lloyd Webster 

Carolina — S. F. Webster, Lee McCollum 

Sharpe & Smith Farmers— W. S. Smith, D. C. Hoilman 
Mebane (one set buyers) 

Farmers — Jule Allen, Bill Allen 

Piedmont — Billy Hopkins, Jimmy Hopkins 
Mt. Airy (one set buyers) 

New Farmers — Tom Jones, O. L. Badgett, Boyd Cain, F. V. 
Dearmin, Jr. 

Dixie— W. H. Brown, H. Y. Hodges, Fred E. Chilton 

Hunter's— J. W. Hunter, W. R. Fowler 
Reidsville (one set buyers) 

New Farmers — G. E. Smith, Steve Smith, P. D. McMichael, 
Phillip Carter 

Leader-Smothers — A. P. Sands, Tom Kimbro, T. G. Smothers, 
Tom Garland 
Roxboro (one set buyers) 

Farmers — Lindsay Wagstaff, R. A. Hester 

Hyco — F. J. Hester, Jr. 

Foacre — H. W. Winstead, Jr., Pres. 

Planters Whse. #2— T. O. Pass, Sr. & Jr. 

Pioneer — Elmo Mitchell, Roy Carver 
Stoneville (one set buyers) 

Joyce's — O. P. Joyce, W. R. Joyce 

Farmers-Piedmont — R. N. Linville, Clarence Peeples, W. Q. Chilton, 
Robert & Garland Rakestraw 
Winston-Salem (four sets buyers) 

Carolina-Star — R. W. Newsome, W. B. Simpson, H. M. Bouldin 

Growers— W. G. Sheets, Joe Pell, C. R. Harris, R. J. Harris 

Pepper's — C. F. Hutchins, Joe Cook, Homer Dearmin 

Taylor — Mrs. Paris Pepper, L. E. Pope 

Big Winston — Taylor Carter & Jack Carter 

Cook's — B. E. Cook, Claude Strickland, Jr., P. Thomas 

Planters — Paul Draughn, Roger L. Nichols, F. Smithdeal 
Yadkinville (full buying power not represented) 

Millers Tob. Whse. — R. A. Owen, Anderson Miller 

BURLEY BELT 

Asheville (two sets buyers) 

Dixie-Burley — R. A. Owen 

Planters — J. W. Stewart 

Walker Warehouse — James E. Walker 

Day's — Charlie Day 
Boone (one set buyers) 

Mountain Burley — Joe E. Coleman 
West Jefferson (one set buyers) 

Tri-State Burley— Rex Taylor 

Farmers Burley — Mrs. Tom Faulkner 

30 



STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE 

James A. Gbaham, Commissioner 

Ex-Officio Chairman 

J. Atwell Alexander Stony Point 

Fred N. Colvard Jefferson 

Guy E. Fisher Pendleton 

Claxtoe T. Hall Roxboro 

George P. Kittrell Corapeake 

Charles F. Phillips Thomasville 

J. H. Poole West End 

Henry Gray Shelton Speed 

James L. Sutherland Laurinburg 

David Townsend, Jr Rowland 



DOMESTIC TAX PAID CIGARETTE CONSUMPTION 
BY KINDS 1969 




Total Domestic Consumption 
520 Billion Cigarettes